January 2024 transfer window thread.

[WolfLing]

Obviously it depends on the total turnover. 30% at 400m is 120m and a huge profit, 30% at 150m is 45m still a decent profit.

But if this more stringent interpretation is the actual limit on spending, then we are going to see large scale reductions in wages and transfer fees over the next 3-4 years.

Also worth asking where will those large scale profit margins go. Cheaper tickets, I somehow doubt that, and that will in any case just lower turnover, therefore furthering lower allowable player spending.

The actual meaning and effect of PSR has yet to be seen or understood, imv.

But the 70% doesn't cover everything a club spends. It covers the costs of the squad and manager etc.

So the 30% that is left will be mainly swallowed up elsewhere, especially for clubs our size, as the other costs of running a club are a higher proportion of our revenues.

Bigger clubs, with much higher turnovers will see bigger profits, yes. Maybe they can then start reinvesting that into their infrastructure, rather than play in a crumbling old stadium like United.

 

[Jd132]

I don't think it's about there being no money, I think value is very important to us now because we've not had value from deals we've done in the recent past, and we are still carrying the burden of that.

There's a couple of aspects we need to pay attention to financially, the rolling losses, and the squad cost rules.

I think from the players we've sold, we are now fine when it comes to rolling losses, as our profit this season will be more than enough.

But I think it's more about the squad cost rules where we need to be careful.

I estimate that our total amortised transfer costs for our current squad is sitting at around £45m per season.

I also estimate our current wage bill is sitting at around £55m per season.

Our revenues were last reported as £165m, so going into next season our total spend on amortised transfer fees, plus wages can't be more than 80% of this, a £132m limit.

Then the following 24/25 season, it will need to be 70% of revenues, so a limit of £115.5m.

With the estimated £45m amortised fees, plus £55m wages coming to £100m, we are well below both the 80% for next season and the 70% for the season after, based on the current squad of players.

But the problem comes in that we are still carrying a lot of cost for the dead wood.

I estimate the remaining amortisation on the players we have out on loan to be around £18.5m per season (Guedes £5.2m, Podence £2m, Fabio £6m, Kalajdzic £3.2m, others around £2m). Plus another £15m in wages on top.

So another £33.5m on top of the figures above if we can't move them on and they come back to the club and we pay their full wages.

That puts us above the squad cost rules for next season, £133.5m against a limit of £132m, and that's assuming revenues remain unchanged.

It's highly unlikely they will come back and play for us, but it's been mentioned many times about there potentially being a lot of selling clubs this summer, but perhaps not many buyers. What if we commit to a big option or obligation now, only to find we can't shift a lot of the loan players in the summer? Either on loan with their wages covered, or permanently?

We could find ourselves in a position where we are letting players leave for less than their value just to satisfy the squad cost rules. Players that were already bad value for us, become even worse value.

I think spending this summer will be largely reliant on getting fees for the players on loan, to remove their amortisation and wages from the equation and give us a bit more headroom going into the 80% and 70% squad cost seasons.

A couple of new contracts could bring our amortisation for the current squad down a bit. But even then, if you look at where we are to where we need to be for 25/26, there's not a huge amount we can spend before we are close.

A £20m player on a 5 year deal and £50k a week adds £6.6m per year to our amortisation costs + wages.

Assuming the estimates of operating at around £100m at the moment (current squad), with that brought down a bit by some extended contracts, we're probably only looking at 2, maybe 3 maximum in that range to take us up the the limit for 25/26, £115.5m (70% of revenues).

This is very helpful and provides insight as to why Hobbs and Shi are prioritising loans over keeping players on the bench for the here and now, which is probably what Gary would prefer.

It makes sense that selling Sasa, Fabio, Podence, Guedes and maybe even Chiquinho, Hoever, Mosquera, Cundle could be fundamental to our summer.

Hobbs and Shi are probably trying to maximise their value by having them out on loan, rather than on our bench, in the hope that their sales will give us a decent budget for next year.

 

[wolvesjoe]

But the 70% doesn't cover everything a club spends. It covers the costs of the squad and manager etc.

So the 30% that is left will be mainly swallowed up elsewhere, especially for clubs our size, as the other costs of running a club are a higher proportion of our revenues.

Bigger clubs, with much higher turnovers will see bigger profits, yes. Maybe they can then start reinvesting that into their infrastructure, rather than play in a crumbling old stadium like United.

I believe the running costs of a Premier club are mostly significantly below 30% of turnover. For the top 6, who routinely qualify for Europe and have much higher turnover, then there will be very large profits, but even the mid range clubs like Wolves are going to be making significant profits, (in the order of 10-15m a year), if the 70% limit is the one that in practice has precedence.

You may well be right that the 70% rule is the one with priority over 35m allowable loss, but that will represent a seismic shift in elite football finances.

And it does seem strange that this issue has yet to be fully clarified, to my knowledge at least.

 

[WolfLing]

I believe the running costs of a Premier club are mostly significantly below 30% of turnover. For the top 6, who routinely qualify for Europe and have much higher turnover, then there will be very large profits, but even the mid range clubs like Wolves are going to be making significant profits, (in the order of 10-15m a year), if the 70% limit is the one that in practice has precedence.

You may well be right that the 70% rule is the one with priority over 35m allowable loss, but that will represent a seismic shift in elite football finances.

And it does seem strange that this issue has yet to be fully clarified, to my knowledge at least.

It is a seismic shift. I think it's bigger than a lot of people realise. It's a soft salary cap at the very least.

Sustainability is at the heart of it all.

Making losses every year would see any other type of business fail, so why should football be any different.

 

[wolvesjoe]

It is a seismic shift. I think it's bigger than a lot of people realise. It's a soft salary cap at the very least.

Sustainability is at the heart of it all.

Making losses every year would see any other type of business fail, so why should football be any different.

Then why have allowable losses set at a relatively high figure if that is the case.

And spending on infrastructure is ring-fenced already in terms of losses.

That's the contradiction yet to be publicly discussed.

 

[Starsky]

So what happens with Guedes, Silva etc, given the above?

They get loaned out until contract expiry which removes (hopefully) the wage cost each year, if not the amortisation.

I assuming nobody will buy them.

 

[wolvesjoe]

To give a realistic estimate on the impact of this, if the 70% rule has precedence:

Utd turnover circa 700m. 490m available for players wages and transfers.

Wolves turnover circa 200m. 140m available for players wages and transfers.

35m allowable losses then closes that gap by 6% approx if Mtd dont also use their allowable losses.

Of course, one can also argue that this is not so different from the current situation, with a rough 3/4 to one
advantage in terms of available spending.

Also as has happened quite often in recent years, the richer clubs can be very much caught out by failing to qualify for
Europe and have spent highly on the expectation of European competition and income.

 

[WolfLing]

Then why have allowable losses set at a relatively high figure if that is the case.

And spending on infrastructure is ring-fenced already in terms of losses.

That's the contradiction yet to be publicly discussed.

It is a bit of a contradiction. But I suppose it gives a bit of leeway for clubs seeing their revenues massively change following failure to get into the Champions League or Europa?

We also don't know how the squad cost rules will be measured. Is it based on your accounts to be submitted by 31st December? Is it a line in the sand at the start of every season? Should that be a rolling period too, to allow for teams spending more as they go in and out of European places?

Tough one to get spot on for every club.

 

[wolvesjoe]

It is a bit of a contradiction. But I suppose it gives a bit of leeway for clubs seeing their revenues massively change following failure to get into the Champions League or Europa?

We also don't know how the squad cost rules will be measured. Is it based on your accounts to be submitted by 31st December? Is it a line in the sand at the start of every season? Should that be a rolling period too, to allow for teams spending more as they go in and out of European places?

Tough one to get spot on for every club.

The biggest short term change will be in the transfer market, it seems to me. Clubs will be forced to sell at lower prices, book value or below, just to free up space for squad development of any sort. Just seems to be starting to happen, but clubs are still imagining they can get more for their players than is in fact possible.

Martin Samuel at The Times is advocating for much more relaxed spending rules so that the Premier can continue to have first call on the talent, and he is one of the most well-placed journalists in the UK. Newcastle in particular feel blocked by these rules and I believe are lobbying hard against them.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Some people just don't understand positioning in a negotiation! I once sold an old car, all I was asking for was £500. The guy came round, looked at it, said he wanted to buy it, then pulled out the biggest wad of cash you ever seen and tried to offer me £350. Unsurprisingly I laughed at him and told him the price was £500 take it or leave it.

I wanted it off the drive, and would probably have taken £350, but his largesse undid him.

We're in a similar position to the guy, we want the best deal possible, so should be pleading poverty. Whether that's true or not is immaterial, its a negotiating tactic!

Yes it might mean we don't get a number 9, but it's better than having our pants pulled down when there is such a focus on fiscal responsibility

Yes, I used to tell myself that was what Moxey was up to in the last week of January every year.

 

[NothingButNeto]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1750853668771921978

 

[SquaddieWolf]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1750853668771921978

Shame it had to end the way it did for him here. Wish him all the best I the future

 

[Bostin]

The last of the European starting 11 gone. End of an era.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

What I don't really understand is how there's no money. Supposedly at least we didn't want to sell Nunes (even though it enabled us to massively improve the overall squad and still be better off financially). So presumably we didn't have to and we haven't spent all that money. We've loaned out some big wage earners. So Broja (just for example, not saying I think he's the one!) on a loan to buy in the Summer in 24/25 financially, should be fine shouldn't it? Unless Chelsea want the money in 23/24. Or maybe we just think June will be a fire sale and we'll get much better value.

Assuming we were ever really interested, my guess is that we’re just not happy with the deal on offer from Chelsea. I personally wouldn’t want an obligation of £30m for him, even if payment was in 24/25 financial year. Far too risky given his recent injury and form since return. An option in 24/25 for £25m plus addons would be far more reasonable, and even then, on the high side of what I think he’s actually worth. If he were from Man City, it would likely be more like an option for 15m plus a 50% sell on or 25m buy back, and that would be more like what he’s actually worth at the moment.

 

[wwbug]

The biggest short term change will be in the transfer market, it seems to me. Clubs will be forced to sell at lower prices, book value or below, just to free up space for squad development of any sort. Just seems to be starting to happen, but clubs are still imagining they can get more for their players than is in fact possible.

Martin Samuel at The Times is advocating for much more relaxed spending rules so that the Premier can continue to have first call on the talent, and he is one of the most well-placed journalists in the UK. Newcastle in particular feel blocked by these rules and I believe are lobbying hard against them.

If the Premier League stick with FFP it will bring wages and prices down. The players are still there and eventually we will work through this and movement will return.So perhaps we may seem some good . Relax FFP as Samuel suggests and it will just mean more stupid wages and fees .

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Assuming we were ever really interested, my guess is that we’re just not happy with the deal on offer from Chelsea. I personally wouldn’t want an obligation of £30m for him, even if payment was in 24/25 financial year. Far too risky given his recent injury and form since return. An option in 24/25 for £25m plus addons would be far more reasonable, and even then, on the high side of what I think he’s actually worth. If he were from Man City, it would likely be more like an option for 15m plus a 50% sell on or 25m buy back, and that would be more like what he’s actually worth at the moment.

I'm always way too influenced on what I see in the flesh, and as far as I can remember he was truly awful at Molineux. So on that particular one £30 would seem steep, never mind £30m!

My point was a bit more general though. O'Neil seemed to be saying they've looked at the ones they really want and decided they can't afford them, so moved to the next tier. I'm just unclear about why we can't afford to buy players rather than simply deciding they are over-priced. We should have the headroom even if we have to pay now for half a season on amortisation and wages?

 

[wwbug]

I can see some late minute deals going through as some clubs need to off load . Broja for me is not going anywhere unless Chelsea make sensible demands. With his record he is a £20 million striker . And that should be optional .

 

[JOSWolf]

Good luck to Jonny. What a player he was for us before injuries. One of the best full backs I have seen at our club.

 

[Brightonwolf]

Speaking with a Chelsea fan last night re Broja, they are worried that he is going to be a huge success in the future and if they let him go for less than £30m they will end up regretting it.
Their concern with him is he beats himself up too much when he misses an opportunity etc.
£30 million last season didn’t seem a lot but currently it’s massive. What could we actually afford over a 4-5 year contract. Would they accept £15m plus bonuses? Who knows!!

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

I'm always way too influenced on what I see in the flesh, and as far as I can remember he was truly awful at Molineux. So on that particular one £30 would seem steep, never mind £30m!

My point was a bit more general though. O'Neil seemed to be saying they've looked at the ones they really want and decided they can't afford them, so moved to the next tier. I'm just unclear about why we can't afford to buy players rather than simply deciding they are over-priced. We should have the headroom even if we have to pay now for half a season on amortisation and wages?

Obviously the people at the top of the club think differently
We have got rid of a lot of high earners recently,by my calculaions about £10 mil a years worth
That said our wage bill for players was close to £60 mil a year,plus managers staff upkeep etc it all adds up
But we are close to our limits and cannot afford to spend much this month if we want to avoid sanctions,we are already £110 mil plus in the red and even with our sales i cant see a massive profit this season either
We need to lose the -£46 mil and the-£60 mil plus seasons to get some headroom its that simple

 

[wwbug]

Speaking with a Chelsea fan last night re Broja, they are worried that he is going to be a huge success in the future and if they let him go for less than £30m they will end up regretting it.
Their concern with him is he beats himself up too much when he misses an opportunity etc.
£30 million last season didn’t seem a lot but currently it’s massive. What could we actually afford over a 4-5 year contract. Would they accept £15m plus bonuses? Who knows!!

Tell them about Silva . And the fear some fans had that he would make it elsewhere .

 

[wwbug]

Obviously the people at the top of the club think differently
We have got rid of a lot of high earners recently,by my calculaions about £10 mil a years worth
That said our wage bill for players was close to £60 mil a year,plus managers staff upkeep etc it all adds up
But we are close to our limits and cannot afford to spend much this month if we want to avoid sanctions,we are already £110 mil plus in the red and even with our sales i cant see a massive profit this season either
We need to lose the -£46 mil and the-£60 mil plus seasons to get some headroom its that simple

I would have thought Nunes, Neves , Moutinho , Costa , and Jimmy were all big earners. Add Coady , Collins Traore and now Jonny . Then Lopetegui and his crew must have been on a fair whack.
But I suppose Cunha and Sarabia are good earners. £10 million doesn't seem much to cover all those big earners.

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

I would have thought Nunes, Neves , Moutinho , Costa , and Jimmy were all big earners. Add Coady , Collins Traore and now Jonny . Then Lopetegui and his crew must have been on a fair whack.
But I suppose Cunha and Sarabia are good earners.

Yep a few swings and roundabouts,but i was talking of very recent loans and sales in the last month alone
Dont forget GON and his staff dont come for free either
Sarabia is the highest earner we have, and Cunha is second i believe with a combined £8 mil a year, depending what salary site you look at
You can see by those 2 alone where we are as far as wages and why we needed to trim the total down substantially
I do feel we have a little headroom,but its guesswork where we are last season let alone this

 

[fleck1]

I would have thought Nunes, Neves , Moutinho , Costa , and Jimmy were all big earners. Add Coady , Collins Traore and now Jonny . Then Lopetegui and his crew must have been on a fair whack.
But I suppose Cunha and Sarabia are good earners. £10 million doesn't seem much to cover all those big earners.

Raul and Joao were rumoured to be our highest earners on 100k a week, so there's over £10m a year.

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

Raul and Joao were rumoured to be our highest earners on 100k a week, so there's over £10m a year.

I accept over the last year we have trimmed the wage bill substantially,but we have replaced a lot of players too
Sarabia Cunha Gomes Bellegarde etc so its not as much as we think plus we dont know what pay off JL and his staff got or how much their replacements cost,everything has its price tag

 

[theweave]

We are a premier league team. We have a full house every week. We have recently spent £35m on an 18-year old and £28m on somebody who wanted out before he even arrived. We sold over £100m worth of players less than 6 months ago and reduced our wage bill by millions.

Our reserve keeper couldn’t get a game for Bristol City and our 3rd choice is so bad we would probably play Kilman in goal if the other two were injured.

We don’t have a number 9 who
has scored a single league goal and we can’t even afford to bring in a championship cast off striker.

Just look at those facts and let them sink in.

The only fair way to describe how our senior management have acted to get ourselves into such a position is ‘gross incompetence and negligence’.

This is indisputable.

You'd have to be pretty naive to think we paid 35 million for Silva. That's just what was put on paper, we all know it was paying off money owed for letting us have Neves and Boly cheap. Its how Mendes works.

 

[wwbug]

Yep a few swings and roundabouts,but i was talking of very recent loans and sales in the last month alone
Dont forget GON and his staff dont come for free either
Sarabia is the highest earner we have, and Cunha is second i believe with a combined £8 mil a year, depending what salary site you look at
You can see by those 2 alone where we are as far as wages and why we needed to trim the total down substantially
I do feel we have a little headroom,but its guesswork where we are last season let alone this

So if Sarabia and Cunha are on 8 million a year between two of them.
How much have we saved on Moutinho Neves , Nunes Costa, Traore, Collins, Podence, Jonny, Jimmy, Coady Sasa and Silva ? £40 million or even more ?

 

[Aurum Lupus]

Yes, I used to tell myself that was what Moxey was up to in the last week of January every year.

The fact is its a gamble, and could see us not sign someone still. However I don't believe it's for want of trying.

Moxey may be a different story, but I think both Hobbs and GON have done enough to earn our trust.

Transfers have many different moving parts that can all cause a deal to fail. Look at Joao Gomes, most footballers wouldn't have taken the stand he did, and the deal would have fallen through, with absolutely no blame on the Wolves recruitment team. However there are many on here who would instantly associate the blame with the club just based on their own uninformed prejudices.

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

So if Sarabia and Cunha are on 8 million a year between two of them.
How much have we saved on Moutinho Neves , Nunes Costa, Traore, Collins, Podence, Jonny, Jimmy, Coady Sasa and Silva ? £40 million or even more ?

Quite possibly but as i say we have bought players in too,swings and roundabouts
We have certainly knocked £20 mil off the wage bill but probably needed too

 

[Madmalc]

Loaning a player out doesn't reduce the amortisation or write off costs of their transfer fee.
So the profit and loss is still taking the hit for Fabio, Guedes, Sara, and Podence transfer fee write downs this season. If they aren't sold it will carry on until their contract ends. Rumour had it some of the clubs taking our players on loan weren't even paying their full wages, so I doubt there's much incoming by way of a loan fee for some of them.
If there are no takers for loans for them next year we take the full hit on their wages.
Jonny going to PAOK would probably show a financial hit this season but allow us to move in 2024/5.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Loaning a player out doesn't reduce the amortisation or write off costs of their transfer fee.
So the profit and loss is still taking the hit for Fabio, Guedes, Sara, and Podence transfer fee write downs this season. If they aren't sold it will carry on until their contract ends. Rumour had it some of the clubs taking our players on loan weren't even paying their full wages, so I doubt there's much incoming by way of a loan fee for some of them.
If there are no takers for loans for them next year we take the full hit on their wages.
Jonny going to PAOK would probably show a financial hit this season but allow us to move in 2024/5.

Very true. The reality is that sending them on loan does still help if they are not going to figure in our squad. Firstly it reduces the wage bill to the extent the loan club is covering some or all of their wages. Secondly it gives them playing time which could help to secure them a permanent move in the summer. Thirdly it gets them away from Compton, and the risk they disrupt our squad if they are unhappy.

 

[Supadavewolf]

Firstly it reduces the wage bill to the extent the loan club is covering some or all of their wages. Secondly it gives them playing time which could help to secure them a permanent move in the summer. Thirdly it gets them away from Compton, and the risk they disrupt our squad if they are unhappy.

And (most importantly) fourth, it gives us something to moan about when either they're not selected or they're playing so well "we should have kept them here".

 

[lobodelsur]

The last of the European starting 11 gone. End of an era.

Doherty ?

 

[steve vena]

Have I missed Newcastle in meltdown? My twitter feed seems to entirely consist of Romano quoting Howe as saying he'd like to keep players, but it's not in his control - Joelinton, Almeiron, Wilson...? Of course if any of them go to Saudi a whole new range of questions (especially if it's a part-ex for Neves!

Joelinton out for the season I think.

 

[mad_leaf]

Presumably this summer there is a huge fire sale from a lot of clubs. This is highly likely to drive down prices of nearly all players. We are planning to sell our top assets but that could be massively less in the new market.

 

[Northampton_wolf]

Joelinton out for the season I think.

He's out but won't agree a new deal so they feel they may need to sell him for value in summer for ffp/psr

 

[steve vena]

He's out but won't agree a new deal so they feel they may need to sell him for value in summer for ffp/psr

Gerrmin !

 

[wwbug]

Quite possibly but as i say we have bought players in too,swings and roundabouts
We have certainly knocked £20 mil off the wage bill but probably needed too

I believe we would have saved a lot more than £20 million .
Lopetegui and his Spanish crew , far more expensive than GON and his British crew.
Lamina , Gomes, Doyle and Bellegarde are not anywhere near Moutinho, Nunes , Jimmy, Neves, Costa ,Traore type salaries.
Then theres that tasty profit made on Neves alone to clear around £40 million of past losses.
This years results published around March 2025 will make interesting reading.

 

[goldeneyed]

So after all the verbiage here it will again be a last 24 hour trolley dash by the club with perhaps one loan of God knows who if we are lucky and at least two last minute failed bids reported. The usual comments from the club after. So we might as well all chill out and wait for that last 24 hours prepared for disappointments as rabbits fail to come out of hats.

 

[North West Wanderer]

So after all the verbiage here it will again be a last 24 hour trolley dash by the club with perhaps one loan of God knows who if we are lucky and at least two last minute failed bids reported. The usual comments from the club after. So we might as well all chill out and wait for that last 24 hours prepared for disappointments as rabbits fail to come out of hats.